Meta Australian Smash 4 General Ruleset Discussion

[Gords]

@ Shaya what does america sit on this front, do they see customs banned as the inevitable case. from talking to you before the only reason why they are not keen on it at the moment is because its so stupid unlocking everything.

Weren't we going to wait for the APEX ruleset before deciding on customs? Or was it just Victoria that was doing that.
I really would like to see Australia united on the customs front. I don't want to live in a customs-banned region then travel to Sydney for a major and lose to Timber Counter or some other jank like that.

Waiting for Apex regarding customs is not smart given that unlocking customs on 100s of consoles alone will likely mean they wont be allowed, with this being the sole reason for their exclusion. nothing to do with their viability in tournament, purely the how early Apex after Smash WiiU launch

Also i had a quick skim through that thread.
I think Olimar needs 3311, or at least 1311, although i guess 1312 is the one olimars are actually going for

 

[Shaya]

Eh, apex in itself won't be enough to convince me they should be banned.

 

[Luco]

Yeah Gords, that's the way the movesets are done.

Ampharos contacted every single character board and asked them for six 'crucial' sets that defined their best custom capabilities across match-ups, leaving 2222 and 3333 as slots 7 and 8 for people to be able to "hit the lab" and test the exact functions of these customs. Most boards came up with between 3-6 pretty easily, so that's good. They're all recorded in that thread.

 

[TakFR]

I know this won't affect anyone but i'd just like to reiterate that if customs are allowed, i'm done with this game. Letting specific ones through only also doesn't work due to people always wanting more from their characters

 

[Dre89]

I know this won't affect anyone but i'd just like to reiterate that if customs are allowed, i'm done with this game. Letting specific ones through only also doesn't work due to people always wanting more from their characters

Why do you dislike customs so much? They add variety and depth to the game. Some characters like DK are significantly more competitive with custom moves.

 

[Luco]

I know this won't affect anyone but i'd just like to reiterate that if customs are allowed, i'm done with this game. Letting specific ones through only also doesn't work due to people always wanting more from their characters

Please shoot me the reason you dislike customs. I'm all ears; and i've heard quite a few reasons by now.

 

[TakFR]

It's been covered multiple times in this thread but i'll say some of them

1) Learning and dealing with matchup details for every single custom move (216 in total)
2) Unlocking all of the custom moves for a setup to be used in tournaments
3) Some of the moves are completely ******** (Dr Mario's Giant Pill that combos into grab, as well as into itself when at a close distance, i've only tried some before realizing that there was no point since they would be banned regardless
4) The game itself has things I already don't like, lack of friction in movement (aka sliding everywhere), rolling being harder to punish then it should be, metagame already seems to be heading more towards brawl which is one of the reasons I stopped playing that.

I'm willing to give the game a chance (more then most other melee players in Melbourne in fact) but custom movesets is pushing it too far to me, i'll just play something I enjoy more if it comes to that.

 

[luke_atyeo]

its looking pretty likely customs will be legal in act/nsw, better pack up and head back to melee

 

[TakFR]

No problem with that, I know i'm not the only one who hates customs and it will definitely hurt the scene by including them (so many people here in VIC hate customs). But if the scene as a whole thinks it's worth it then good luck to you (I'm being geniune in case you were thinking otherwise)

 

[Zediwonder]

I think the hassle and effort to unlock customs on setups is worth it, it creates more interesting MU's and strategies and gives a lot of characters much needed boosts, I think that's how most people who are in favour of customs think about it. Playing at Smash gym today it does take a lot of time to set up all the customs and you simply can't have every option available with the slots available which even with "standard" customs some enlightened individual will have a different set that won't be available without a 3ds transfer or removing another set.

There's good arguments for both sides, I think for the sake of this games competitive longevity that customs be allowed, it's a small hassle to put up with for a more interesting scene, not to mention so many players now having gotten used to customs on 3ds just dropping characters that can't play anymore because of it like Villager or Palutena. I haven't seen any customs that have unbalanced the game to an unfair point so I don't see any reason that TO's and players can use having to unlock customs as an excuse. I'm not gonna quit playing if they're banned, but I think that Smash 4 would be less enjoyable than Brawl even without tripping in that case.

 

[Luco]

It's been covered multiple times in this thread but i'll say some of them

1) Learning and dealing with matchup details for every single custom move (216 in total)
2) Unlocking all of the custom moves for a setup to be used in tournaments
3) Some of the moves are completely ******** (Dr Mario's Giant Pill that combos into grab, as well as into itself when at a close distance, i've only tried some before realizing that there was no point since they would be banned regardless
4) The game itself has things I already don't like, lack of friction in movement (aka sliding everywhere), rolling being harder to punish then it should be, metagame already seems to be heading more towards brawl which is one of the reasons I stopped playing that.

I'm willing to give the game a chance (more then most other melee players in Melbourne in fact) but custom movesets is pushing it too far to me, i'll just play something I enjoy more if it comes to that.

Ah okay. Most of those were reasonably addressed earlier in the topic, so it feels to me like this comes down to your personal preference. I'll go through my response to them all anyways, just in case though.

We covered that most custom moves are totally bogus (as in, bad) and only a few will be reasonably considered across the board, so in reality you're learning far, far less than 216 custom moves would imply; and yet it's a fair thing to do, and most customs don't change the MU to an extremity where it might as well be a different match-up.

On the subject of no. 2, that is exactly the purpose of the thread I put above and it literally takes 1 enthusiastic person and everyone has a viable set up. It's not hard, you don't have to put any work into it if you don't want to.

As for no. 3, you guys specifically tested tournaments with customs on and customs off. V won both of them. It's only one event, so go ahead and call me out on consistency; but I can do the exact same thing to you and say you can't possibly tell me they're ban-worthy. In other areas they've been trialed and tested. With the possible exception of the one-inch punch (even that is very, very iffy and unreliable), i'm yet to see a custom move that is actually broken. Timber counter? Hey, great, fantastic move, allows for incredible stage control. Best move in the game? Nahhhh, far from it. Plenty of moves force you to do other things, like Pac-man's trampoline. Timber counter for sure is very, very good, but it requires commitment from villager if he wants to keep that stage control and characters that out-camp him mean there's very little benefit. So sure it's a great move and changes many MUs, but it's not a game-winning brain-dead custom, and currently both our tournament results are reflecting that.

And with no. 4... that's an individual thing and i'm sure you know that. I'm not going to dismiss it, though I think rolls are probably okay; but I feel it's unfair to bring that up as a reason to ban customs - you know, "I don't like X, Y and Z and if W were included it'd be too much for me" feels a bit arbitrary for me but... well yeah.

I respect your opinion not to have customs on a personal level; but truly truly truly I think as a whole they benefit the scene, and once you guys actually see it a bit more in practice (as the rest of the world adapts to it as i'm pretty sure they will), I think you'll warm up to them a bit more.

 

[Splice]

If I want to take Smash 4 seriously than I'd want to play it in a setting/ruleset that is compatible with International competition.

Anyone that is interested in the competition and "getting good" should value the development of metagame in the more widely accepted ruleset, rather than getting caught up in the principals and philosophies surrounding the legality of certain game features.
On that note, depth does not infinitely augment competitive gameplay; at a point, more features dilute the development and optimization of certain styles of play. It may certainly add variety, but this is not necessarily beneficial to competition.

It is yet to be proven whether customs are beneficial in the effort of creating a larger array of viable characters, but they are more troublesome to set-up and come with a few problems in a tournament setting. Aside from that, I'm of the opinion that the game does not require added depth in requiring players to understand more moves and their impact on MU's. Character MU's are already complicated and can take time to get a worldly understanding of. Adding variations to movesets will harm players ability to learn the inside and out of MU's.

You would need to be functioning on a high mental level in game but also well educated on the interaction of all characters frame data before you start suggesting this game needs further depth. People who want to work towards that skill and understanding are negatively affected by not having unified rulesets, and imo, by the logistics surrounding customs.

 

[Luco]

If I want to take Smash 4 seriously than I'd want to play it in a setting/ruleset that is compatible with International competition.

Anyone that is interested in the competition and "getting good" should value the development of metagame in the more widely accepted ruleset, rather than getting caught up in the principals and philosophies surrounding the legality of certain game features.
On that note, depth does not infinitely augment competitive gameplay; at a point, more features dilute the development and optimization of certain styles of play. It may certainly add variety, but this is not necessarily beneficial to competition.

It is yet to be proven whether customs are beneficial in the effort of creating a larger array of viable characters, but they are more troublesome to set-up and come with a few problems in a tournament setting. Aside from that, I'm of the opinion that the game does not require added depth in requiring players to understand more moves and their impact on MU's. Character MU's are already complicated and can take time to get a worldly understanding of. Adding variations to movesets will harm players ability to learn the inside and out of MU's.

You would need to be functioning on a high mental level in game but also well educated on the interaction of all characters frame data before you start suggesting this game needs further depth. People who want to work towards that skill and understanding are negatively affected by not having unified rulesets, and imo, by the logistics surrounding customs.

That's not a bad argument (ironically quite a lot of people are already suggesting the game needs more depth for them to want to play it; but most of those people I don't think regularly attend tournaments and such so...); though I disagree with the logistics part because, once again, one enthusiastic person will literally do it for all of you and same up here.

Perhaps my support for customs' ability to create a more balanced roster is because i've spent a lot of time in the competitive impressions thread as well as toying around with stuff myself. It's a gut feeling at this stage for me that customs seem to benefit the 'bad' characters far more than the good ones, and generally it leads to a much more balanved game when playing. Is that something we should be striving for? I think we should, though at this point it's only my instinct that tells me that.

In regards to depth... is it that unfair to expect people to put a bit more time into MUs for an overall deeper game, one with a higher ceiling? Melee and Brawl achieved depth in different ways; melee's depth came from its mechanics and Brawl's depth from understanding flow, attack and counter-attack, etc. Smash 4 has a bit of both; though I think customs would be a good way to still have the game played at a really fun level whilst allowing for more we can look into. And just because customs are used, certainly doesn't mean you have to. I use default everything, so it's not the be-all and end-all of everything.

I don't know whether I can agree that more depth is necessarily a bad thing in this particular instance. I'll think on it, though.

 

[DD_]

If I want to take Smash 4 seriously than I'd want to play it in a setting/ruleset that is compatible with International competition.

Anyone that is interested in the competition and "getting good" should value the development of metagame in the more widely accepted ruleset, rather than getting caught up in the principals and philosophies surrounding the legality of certain game features.
On that note, depth does not infinitely augment competitive gameplay; at a point, more features dilute the development and optimization of certain styles of play. It may certainly add variety, but this is not necessarily beneficial to competition.

It is yet to be proven whether customs are beneficial in the effort of creating a larger array of viable characters, but they are more troublesome to set-up and come with a few problems in a tournament setting. Aside from that, I'm of the opinion that the game does not require added depth in requiring players to understand more moves and their impact on MU's. Character MU's are already complicated and can take time to get a worldly understanding of. Adding variations to movesets will harm players ability to learn the inside and out of MU's.

You would need to be functioning on a high mental level in game but also well educated on the interaction of all characters frame data before you start suggesting this game needs further depth. People who want to work towards that skill and understanding are negatively affected by not having unified rulesets, and imo, by the logistics surrounding customs.

/Thread

If we're not following something along the same vein as the US or JP then why even bother? The game without customs is already more than enough for us to work with for the next few years

 

[Luco]

/Thread

If we're not following something along the same vein as the US or JP then why even bother? The game without customs is already more than enough for us to work with for the next few years

My point being that the rest of the world (at least America) will likely be following this trend if that 88% was anything to go by.

 

[Gords]

I am pretty sure the majority of America are pro customs, but they are aware that customs being stupidly difficult and time consuming to unlock on WiiU poses an issue for the tournament environment, However it appears solutions to this problem are there and beng expanded on which will make logistics infinitely better and probably more stream lined than actually having players change customs sets every game. even if customs were easily unlocked or unlocked by default the idea and concepts described in the thread @ Luco posted would still probably be beneficial for tournaments

 

[luke_atyeo]

if the only problem is logistics, then that wont be a problem, when project M was first becoming a thing there was a big worry about the logistics of having it setup on everyones wii and that didnt end up barring the game from being viable.
Our smash community can overcome any logistical hurdles.

 

[Splice]

if the only problem is logistics

It isn't.

The rise of PM in Sydney I think is very different to how it went in VIC, but I'm gonna assume you guys wanted to play the game and you liked it so you made it happen despite the problem of hacking everyones Wii etc.
While the logistics in themselves can be worked through, the difference here is that unlike PM we have a functional tournament game without going through these logistics, and we're not sure it's worth the trouble; it may not be beneficial to competitive spirit and gameplay. So that means we don't have the standard strength of the entire community working together atm

While I stand by my previous opening statement of wanting a ruleset "compatible with International Competition" (as in, if America agrees as a whole that customs should be legal, then the case is as good as settled in my mind), I don't actually think customs will make for a better competitive experience. They might make more viable characters but I think there are quite a few already and having a surplus viable characters is not necessarily a good thing.

Anyway depending on what goes on it could be very easy for us to agree with each other Luke, but the main purpose for my previous post was actually to disagree with Shaya. It is careless to suggest we should split, and to not heed the conduct of events outside your own sub-scene in the smash community. We should try to play with rulesets that will have integrity interstate, so having the same rules on customs between VIC/NSW/Perth/QLD/SA/ACT is a good thing if players ever want to try their luck out of state. Minor discrepancies in stagelists would be of less impact and would be fine to differ between states, but whether we use customs or not is a big deal.

 

[luke_atyeo]

please re-read my post, then your post, then think about what you've done

 

[Luco]

I don't think I can agree with that logic Splice, I think more viable characters is almost always a good thing haha.

I think it's easiest to take this argument a bit further to identify its base roots.

I know it's an overdone meme; but fox v fox with no items on final destination is a rich and deep game and adding any more characters would inhibit people's ability to play the game... is true at first glance but we know that's ridiculous. I asked Ampharos for a bit of clarification on this idea and he told me that having to learn a deeper, more varied game is indefinitely good for competition because it rewards dedication to the game and keeps it fresh for years on end.

He also mentioned that this dedication is particularly important in regards to the game's lifespan. Having a game with a broad ruleset like this rewards those dedicated players who 'main' in smash 4, whereas a more limited ruleset with a less deep game is better for those that only play smash 4 on the side.

Meaning that if you entertain the thought of smash 4 being a long-lasting competitive game, it's far better to allow a broader ruleset with more depth and knowledge needed to succeed. Thinking about it, games with a massive information gap can still be very good and popular in competition. Starcraft requires an immense amount of knowledge and practice, same with DoTA, in fact professional DoTA players take years and years to get into the competitive scene, as i'm sure you know. You could argue smash isn't like those games and isn't meant to be played to the same level of depth but then i'd just argue that you're kinda selling the game short.

 

[Splice]

please re-read my post, then your post, then think about what you've done

Classic. I see my error was responding to the one and only Luke_atyeo

oh woops there i go again

 

[Zediwonder]

I can agree that this is a matter that should be a universal rule across the world for rulesets, with a split scene even within our own country a lot of players will stop showing up to tournaments based solely on whether customs are banned or not. Kneecapping the scene like this just so we can play how we feel is the most competitive is not a good strategy.

With what Luco and all the guys in the customs project are planning I don't think there's any reason why customs can't be allowed outside of balancing I don't fully understand. If players can't wait 5 minutes for their opponent to prepare for their game then that's just bad sportsmanship.

 

[CyberHyperPhoenix]

So I was thinking about Character variety in Smash 4 (and in general) and character drafting came up in Japan time podcast #30

The part I'm talking about is at 40:58

What are your guy's opinions on this? I'm kind of on the fence tbh, but Warchamp does make a a good point about the character variety part. We should try at least try and experiment with the drafting rule. Also 3v3's are really hype, I like the Idea of having them at tournies.

 

[luke_atyeo]

Classic. I see my error was responding to the one and only Luke_atyeo

oh woops there i go again

see now we are agreeing


Also I tried a 3v3 ruleset for brawl ages ago and despite the people who tried it liking it, it never took off.



"ok so how does it work? First up players will be split into a number of pools, which will be seeded, and the top 'x' number of people will move through past pools into a double elimination bracket (x number to be decided on the day depending on time and numbers)

As for the actual ruleset I'll be doing something a little different and debuting my own ruleset, the 'Atyeo ruleset' (for lack of a better name) - ruleset subject to change in regards to points and whatnot -
Each player must pick 3 characters before each set and write them down on a piece of paper, which their starting character specified (the order for the other 2 characters doesnt need to be pre determined)

Each Team cannot excede 12 'character points'
which is basically a way to balance out the teams in regards to the tier list - see below

Each team cannot have duplicates of the same character


TOP
S Worth 8 Character points

HIGH
A Worth 7 Character points
B Worth 6 Character points

Middle
C Worth 5 Character points
D Worth 4 Character points
E :shiek: Worth 3 Character points

Low
F Worth 2 Character points
G Worth 1 Character points

Each players team will face off in a crew style battle

so the first match is played out between both players starting characters using the general rules as listed below, the winner of the first match carrys over his remaining stocks on his character into the next battle (for example if there was a wolf V samus and the wolf won with 2 stock remaining, the next match would begin with wolf having 2 stock against the samus players next character) and so on untill 1 player has no more characters left."

 

[CyberHyperPhoenix]

see now we are agreeing


Also I tried a 3v3 ruleset for brawl ages ago and despite the people who tried it liking it, it never took off.



"ok so how does it work? First up players will be split into a number of pools, which will be seeded, and the top 'x' number of people will move through past pools into a double elimination bracket (x number to be decided on the day depending on time and numbers)

As for the actual ruleset I'll be doing something a little different and debuting my own ruleset, the 'Atyeo ruleset' (for lack of a better name) - ruleset subject to change in regards to points and whatnot -
Each player must pick 3 characters before each set and write them down on a piece of paper, which their starting character specified (the order for the other 2 characters doesnt need to be pre determined)

Each Team cannot excede 12 'character points'
which is basically a way to balance out the teams in regards to the tier list - see below

Each team cannot have duplicates of the same character

TOP
S Worth 8 Character points

HIGH
A Worth 7 Character points
B Worth 6 Character points

Middle
C Worth 5 Character points
D Worth 4 Character points
E :shiek: Worth 3 Character points

Low
F Worth 2 Character points
G Worth 1 Character points

Each players team will face off in a crew style battle

so the first match is played out between both players starting characters using the general rules as listed below, the winner of the first match carrys over his remaining stocks on his character into the next battle (for example if there was a wolf V samus and the wolf won with 2 stock remaining, the next match would begin with wolf having 2 stock against the samus players next character) and so on untill 1 player has no more characters left."

So basically CVS2 Ratio system? This actually sounds pretty cool.... Now if only I had people to try this with

 

[Luco]

Hmm, it's an interesting idea... I don't know how I feel about it actually, which is ironic considering that from my previous argument you'd expect me to argue in favour of learning more towards the option that favours more 'dedication'... but is it dedication? The difference here is, smashers in the past have often been more than willing to put their time into learning match-ups extensively... here, the rule is almost arbitrary because it would all become about your main being banned and your secondary being banned, until everyone is just playing their 3rd best character all the time. Most smashers often don't put much time into more than 2 or 3 different characters, so i'm not sure exactly how I feel about that right now.

In fact, it's because the game feels so balanced that this probably wouldn't work.

A simple way of putting it is that if someone goes against me, they're not going to ban Diddy Kong because he's 'such an invalidating character' (pssst, he's not!!). Against me, it's far more valuable to ban Ness and Duck Hunt, so i'd be forced into using Bowser Jr as the only character I still use that hasn't been banned. I think it would only 'solve' the diddy problem in so far as it stops diddy mains using diddy.... but it also stops everyone else using their best character too. :/

 

[luke_atyeo]

I dunno if smash 4 needs this, but I reckon if brawl had adopted this it would have helped brawl to not die out as it would have made the game significantly different from melee (and thus brawl wouldn't have just been trying to be a 'bad melee') and it was the best option I feel for addressing the meta knight situation.
Since smash 4 doesnt seem to have a meta knight, there is less argument for this kinda ruleset.

 

[Zediwonder]

Perhaps rather than a character ban a custom ban could be use, though this would weigh heavily against characters like Palutena which almost always have Super Speed or Lightweight on their set.

It's better than straight up banning characters, the game needs variety to keep it evolving and changing but it stops up and coming players from being able to play their best when they've barely mastered a single character. I don't think the game needs so many new rules for it be as competitive as melee, it should let it's gameplay speak for itself to some extent, adding in a drafting and banning system would have a more negative effect to the scene as no one would end up playing their best characters ever as they're banned and no one enjoys being forced to play or watch someone not at their best.

 

[luke_atyeo]

^ I agree with the whole "**** I cant play the character I want"

The ruleset I used for brawl above you still got to pick characters you like and nobody could ban a character from you

 

[TakFR]

We used the Atyeo ruleset in melee a year or two ago, it was really good but for some reason we never did it again :/

 

[luke_atyeo]

We used the Atyeo ruleset in melee a year or two ago, it was really good but for some reason we never did it again :/

whaaaat?
when!?
why was I never told about it :'<

 

[Redact]

We used the Atyeo ruleset in melee a year or two ago, it was really good but for some reason we never did it again :/

dunno bout you but i hated it hey, I'd rather just play good characters. Almost everyone I talked to didn't want it again either thus it was never played again.

how often do most people play low tier characters in friendlies once there is a developed meta?

I don't at all. I play falco/fox/falcon/marth because they're fun, not just because they're good.

low tier vs low tier super boring to watch as well. woo roy vs mewtwo so intense.

This is all relevant to melee immediately, but when it comes to late brawl it was the same thing, next to no low tiers in friendlies whenever it was played and a large amount of people like to just stick to their 1 or 2 characters in top tier.

 

[Splice]

When it comes to nurturing an actual competitive scene and honing good players, there's not much place for screw around rulesets. There's meets all the time and people have friends right? Take your fun new activity there.

Being frequently involved in conversations on how to optimise shine mixups and how approaching actually works and analysing vids of USA players in skype calls with other members of the community is so refreshing, and does far more justice to players who are serious about their passion with these games competitively. I hope we continue to support these players when it comes to how we handle Smash4.

If you want players to stay motivated and keep them interested in the game then it's good to have something to work towards.

Indecisiveness on rules and too many players who complain rather than overcome threw off far more VIC Brawl players than the 'stagnant' (yet totally underdeveloped) gameplay. Largely, controversy around playing/banning MK may not have made one person quit but on the whole it killed a lot of enthusiasm.

 

[TakFR]

whaaaat?
when!?
why was I never told about it :'<

Yeah it was in Vic about 2 years ago, we didn't have nearly as much new blood then so it wouldn't really be good now since most new players only use one character and want to focus on them only, it really would be a bad idea to use now implement it now I'm just saying I liked the one time we did use it

I liked it because I could use mid tiers without having to worry as much about the Fox matchup, I find some mid tiers fun to play such as Luigi, Link etc. It's all opinion based anyway :/

 

[luke_atyeo]

readact with the "I cant play low tiers" salt
Every not Melbourne state had plenty of low tier play, Melbourne brawl players are all no skill tier whores #shots fired

seriously though, I dont think that the rule set is very good for melee, first there isnt really a balance problem and second the high tiers feel and play very differently (as you put it, fun). I dont think you could make that same statement about brawl.

Anyways we've kinda gotten off topic here, the rule set was developed to help out brawls flaws, and doesn't really suit any other smash game, smash 4 should stick to the traditional one character thing imo.

 

[Redact]

I pump with low tiers Harry ponting would be jealous of my zelda mm me

real talk otherwise duck hunt banned due to glitch/jank?

 

[EverAlert]

You can fall through any stage, duck hunt is not exceptional in this regard (though it does seem more common on stages with moving parts).

If that's enough to ban a stage we should get rid of pokemon stadium in melee, should have gotten rid of castle siege in brawl (**** stage anyway), etc. etc.

 

[Gords]

you can fall through Duck Hunt, when where? I have never seen this.
Duck hunt is not that janky really. it has an irregular platform layout yes but so does DK64, even the dog platform is telegraphed and its position is based on where the last hit bird fell (or in the centre if no bird got hit). birds act like shyguys from the yoshi stages. the only unique things about this stage would then be the grass that hides a very small part of the action for a short time.

 

[Tomo009]

you can fall through Duck Hunt, when where? I have never seen this.
Duck hunt is not that janky really. it has an irregular platform layout yes but so does DK64, even the dog platform is telegraphed and its position is based on where the last hit bird fell (or in the centre if no bird got hit). birds act like shyguys from the yoshi stages. the only unique things about this stage would then be the grass that hides a very small part of the action for a short time.

If you teleport or similar when the dog rises under you, you can fall through. It happens every time the orange "fly away" screen ends.

 

[Gords]

and whats 'or similar' mean?